Most overrated player in the League?

Brad Richards. Here’s a guy who’s name has been in trade rumours on and off for a couple years now, and he was even traded a couple seasons ago. Even though Mike Smith didn’t work out in Tampa, and Jussi Jokinen, and Halpern are both gone, I still say Tampa won this deal by getting rid of the league’s softest, most overpaid, and overrated player.

Why do you all love this guy, and who is your pick for the league’s most overrated?Here are some reasons why I believe this guy is overrated:

1) He’s a softy. I doubt anyone will argue me on this one, people like him despite his soft play and refusal to go into the corners. So I’ll just move on.

2) He’s one of the leagues worst defensive players. Probably a result of being so soft and losing battles, Richards is abysmal in his own end. For a guy who puts up respectable offensive numbers its shocking to look at his +/-. His last 3 years he’s been -4, -19, and -27, and currently sits at -13. In his magical year in 2004 he was +14 in his only plus season, on a first place, stacked young team.

3) $7.8 milllion cap hit. Are you kidding me? And still he pops up in everyones dream trade fantasies??? Get with it people.

4) Turnovers. Could be connected to his soft play and could result in his terrible +/- but Brad Richards is a terrible puck handler. He has blistering speed which blinds the casual fan into thinking he has good hands. When he comes barrelling down on a d-man he can shift one way or the other and go around. But in tight spaces he just turns the puck over without a fight. He mishandles passes at centre way too often, and sometimes just loses it stickhandling, uncontested. This guy is an elite player? An elite skater for sure, speed is good but its not the only thing that makes a hockey player.

5) Conn Smythe. Get over it. I recognize that he had a great playoff run. Scoring lots of perimeter goals. Picking up loose pucks off to the side of the net and scoring in the clutch. He was on fire. Fine. I just wish they’d picked Kipper (equally deserving) or Lecavalier or anyone else, because people won’t let this go. He did light it up against a beat up, broken down Flyers team in the final 4. Good for him. Doesn’t make him a hall of famer. Some suggest he will be… he has 185 career goals and just over 600 pts at age 30. He better hope his 30’s are better than his 20’s or he won’t ever be in the HHOF.

Now for everyone who thinks Brad is this great superstar, I think its because you are blinded by speed. For the most part, from my experience, people who don’t watch a ton of hockey, or don’t see particular teams and players play, they tend to overrate the fast players and underrate the slow players, because speed is the easiest thing to spot and you don’t need to know much about hockey to appreciate a fast skater.

Just to compare the great Richards to a very slow player, let’s say…. oh I don’t know, Nik Antrpov:

Over the past 3 seasons (2 seasons and so far this year) Brad has 53 goals, 124 assists for 177 points. Pretty good! Over that same time period, Antropov has scored 70 goals, 98 assists for 168 points. Just 9 points less, both guys have missed a handful of games each with well do*****ented injuries.

Brad is a career -74, Nik is the exact opposite.

Didn’t want to make this a whole Nik Antropov thing, but this is just an example of a guy who would probably not be considered a superstar by many at all, vs a guy who is considered one of the best (even got Olympic consideration by some of you!) Statistically they’re not far off, and Antropov is the more well rounded player. There are lots of guys like Nik out there who are better than Richards.

Its not 2004 anymore, wake up hockey fans.


181 Responses to Most overrated player in the League?

  1. bbruins37 says:

    haha i can tell by your last line that you're clearly going with your head, and not letting emotions get the better of you.

    i am going to go ahead and assume you've seen seidenberg play maybe once, and even then you paid no attention to him.

    "Phaneuf plays against better players that should have come easily to you."

    yeah too bad that was seidenberg's role in both florida and now boston. phaneuf barely even kill penalties. seidenberg can be used in all situations. as phaneuf is used mainly on the powerplay, he should be connecting on more of his shots with less bodies but nope.

  2. leafmeister says:

    When do guys try and block shots the most? Anyone? Anyone? bbruins any guesses? Who are we kidding, of course not. On the PK. When does Phaneuf play? On the PP, therefor, guys are more likely to block Phaneuf's shots. Also, as a PK guy, whose shot are you trying to block, Dennis Seidenberg, or Dion Phaneuf?

    Lets have a looksy at Florida's PK…24th. Must be the goalie. Nope, the goalie is Tomas Voukoun. Obviously not all his fault, but he clearly wasnt doing too much right if his goalie is Tomas Voukoun and the PK is still bad.

    The PK is not exactly Phaneuf's scene, but he can do it.

  3. leafy says:

    Washington is on pace for 121 points, the second highest total in the last 15 years.

  4. bbruins37 says:

    when do they try to block the most shots? that's all the time. they don't vary their levels of shot-blocking willingness, they just see a higher volume of shots on the PK. Now before you go off saying "ohhh i got you bbruins! it's just because he sees more PK time!", he has over 100 more blocked shots than him. it's not even close.

    i love how you can just generalize about his PK abilities without seeing him play too. i'm beginning to doubt you've seen him play one game now.

  5. bbruins37 says:

    i'm pretty sure most people are basing it on the perception of the player by the media/fans/analysts. at least that's what i go by.

  6. Magleaf says:

    even jari kurri was just past his prime IMO because he had a couple decent years after gretzky and then just went completly garbage

  7. Magleaf says:

    im an idiot, jarri curry was pretty bad w/out him

  8. leafit2me says:

    Quite obvious Leaf and Bruins fans have extremely differing views on the quality of their favorite teams, mgmt and players. IMO if Burke makes the right moves over the next two off seasons, I think that the Leafs are approx 100 regular season games away from doing a complete 180. The key will be do develop the young players and make some smart/ not too expensive acquisitions this year. I think there will be a far better pool of UFA's avail in the summer of 2011 than there are this year. I hear hockey experts on Sportnet, TSN and The Sccore saying repeatedly that the 2011 draft is weak outside of the top 10 and even that might be stretching it because many of them are saying that in 2010's draft, except for the top 5, the rest will definetly not be NHL ready in their draft year. Again this is why i'm not at all upset about the Kessel deal. Had the Leafs had just 5-6 more wins I dont think the Bruins would have much to be excited about.  Outside of a potential 1st/2nd overall pick in 2010, Bozak, Hanson, & Gustavson all rank much higher than a 2010 2nd rounder or 2011 1st rounder.                                                                                                                                                        

  9. leafy says:

    I could not disagree more strongly.

    Anybody who watched hockey in the 1980s knows that Jari Kurri was a phenomenal player, regardless of Gretzky.

    Even AFTER Gretzky got traded from Edmonton, Kurri played 2 seasons with the Oilers, without Gretzky. In those 2 seasons, he scored 102 and 93 points.

    Do NOT confuse the 1990s Kurri with the 80s Kurri.

    Same thing with Denis Savard. Not quite as good in his 30s, but an absolutely amazing player while in his 20s.

  10. leafmeister says:

    There is a specific system on a PP, which often ends with a shot from the point. Also, put yourself in the shoes of a shot blocker, you see Dennis Seidenberg winding up his bomb, or you see Dion Phanef about to blast it. Which shot, if it got through, would have a higher probability of going in? The guy with 75 goals, or the guy with 16.

    Phaneuf is not a shot blocker, he can, but its not his thing. Schenn, Komisarek, and Beauchemin are all capable shot blockers.

    Hey man, I am just looking at the numbers, if he was such a key part, of such a bad PK, and that cannot be blamed on the goalie, then maybe he is not such a PK god. Just sayin.

  11. dizon says:

    lets stop this argument. We are comparing phaneuf and dennis seidenberg.

    really guys?
  12. DannyLeafs says:

    I agree that championships are important, and if Ovechkin never wins one, he will always be in Crosby's shadow. However, I do believe that it is just a matter of time before Ovechkin wins one, and a Conne Smythe to go along with it. Right now, I do value Ovechkins individual awards a little more highly than Crosby's championships, mainly because Crosby has played on better teams, and Crosby has yet to be the best player on a championship team when it mattered most. Ohechkin does have better support players in terms of guys that help his production, but Crosby is on a team that is built to win, with or without him. The point I am getting at, is that if Ovechkin is to win anything, he has to be the best player on his team, whether it is the Olympics, or the Stanley cup, but Crosby has already won championships and never been the best player on the winning team.

    I don't think that Crosby is incapable of raising his game when it matters, but he hasn't yet, and for that reason, I don't give him the edge in accomplishments, simply because he wasn't the best player on his team. Also, Crosby hasn't really proven he is a big game player. If you look at the big games he has played in the last two years (Two stanley cup finals, and 3 elimination games at the Olympics) that is 16 games where he has just registered just 10 points. You look at his two big wins, (The olympics and the cup) thats 10 games, he has just 4 points. I think the golden goal that was easily the biggest accomplishment of his career, and I do believe that will be the end of his big game monkey, but I am just pointing out that I don't think the Championships were won because Crosby is a better player than Ovechkin, simply because, I have no doubt that if you take Crosby off of each of those teams, and put Ovechkin there, the result wouldn't change.

    Anyway, I don't disagree with anyone who thinks Crosby is better, because it is far too early to tell, the styles are too contrasting, and they are so close right now, that nobody can truthfully beleive that they know for an absolute fact who is better, but I do have my reasons for my opinion and will offer them to anyone who wants to express their reasons for theirs.

  13. bbruins37 says:

    good thing you don't get caught up by a player's name

  14. dumbassdoorman says:

    There is no comparrison……ask bbruins…….but we all know how he would be talking if the ruins had aqquired Phaneuf.

  15. bbruins37 says:

    pk god? i'm not implying that. all i'm saying is he can do it very well, unlike phaneuf.

    keep getting caught up by 05'-07' phaneuf though. he's clearly as good now as he was then

  16. DannyLeafs says:

    Normally my posts seem to get under the skin of bbruins because we regularly disagree on many things, despite the fact that I believe both of us have a good knowledge and logical thought process about the league and the game. However hopefully this post doesn't get taken the wrong way and can be discussed rationally.

    I think that Tuuka Rask stands little chance of winning the calder trophy this season despite the fact that in previous years he would have been a lock. His numbers are as good this year as Steve Mason's were last year, and he has been every bit as important to his team as Mason was last year. Note that if you project Thomas's win's per games played to 65 games or so the Bruins would likely not be in playoff contention. He may not get as many games as Mason did last year, but a rookie that pushes last years vezina winner to 1-A status is just as impressive as taking over a number one position from a second teir guy. However, it seems that after Mason's struggles this year, analysts seem a little cold on the idea of naming a goalie as Calder winner again this year. It seems like the reporters that do the voting aren't looking as much at "who has had the best rookie season" as "who they think will most likely be the best player", so many of them may want to cast their ballot for a more sure thing. This year, many people believe it will still be between Duchene and Tavares, even though Myers and Rask are having better years and are taking on bigger roles on their teams. Most of this seems to come from the fact that defensemen and goalies seem more prone to the dreaded softmore slump.

    What does everyone else think?

  17. leafmeister says:

    Again, prove it. All evidence points to him being a very average PK guy. Phaneuf is decent on the PK, but again, we are not paying 6.5 for a penalty killer. Phaneuf is a #1 defensemen who is slumping a bit. Even if he does not recover his game, he is still a top pairing guy.

    Yeah, Savard is not putting up numbers like he did last year, so he clearly will never put up those numbers again. Seriously though, enjoy paying him 4.2 until he is 40.

  18. bbruins37 says:

    i dont think rask has a chance unless he plays more games. you can't win it playing around 30 games. with thomas coming back on fire, i don't think we'll see him play enough games to garner consideration.

    i can't speak for their thought process on how they decide the winner, but i think it will be a joke if howard doesn't win it. if myers won it i could live with it as he's been awesome, but if duchene or tavares were to get it it would just be a joke in my opinion. i mean if they do base the decision on thinking that goalies and defensemen are more prone to sophmore slumps, i don't really know what to say. it doesn't fit the criteria for the award, so it would be a BS award to begin with.

  19. bbruins37 says:

    all i can say is watch him play. you obviously haven't.

    i will enjoy the bruins stealing savard at that contract too, thanks.

  20. leafmeister says:

    I get the sense you leave a lot of your arguing points up to personal interpretation. Since they rarely have any factual/statistical backing.

    I think you missed my point, what I was saying is that a bad season and a half, when you are 24 years old, is about as significant as the Bruins offense. Just as a bad season from Savard is not the norm, thus there is legitimate reason to expect a return to form.

    As for Savard, dont waste him on the so called NHLers Chirelli is putting him with. I know the Bruins are the best team in the league on hold, because of injuries, but if that was hypothetically total bullshit (just a hypothetical of course), than you would be wasting a damn fine play maker.

     

  21. dizon says:

    okay I understand everybody has their own opponions, but are you saying you wouldn’t trade seidenberg for phaneuf?

  22. bbruins37 says:

    no, i said myself phaneuf has more potential, but as of right now seidenberg is the better d-man. taking out salaries as the bruins would be screwed cap-wise doing that trade, phaneuf has more value than seidenberg, so i would do the trade.

  23. bbruins37 says:

    "I get the sense you leave a lot of your arguing points up to personal interpretation. Since they rarely have any factual/statistical backing."

    you can't be serious…i've been accused of doing just that on here too much.

    savard has only proven himself over a countless number of years. phaneuf came in on fire, then trailed off. slumping for 2 years doesn't look so good.

    i think hall or seguin would look nice on savvy's wing though.

  24. Magleaf says:

    i suppose your right, i was looking at the stats and for some reason thought kurri was traded with gretzky.

    he was the best player on the team the year after grertzky was traded

  25. leafmeister says:

    Maybe Hall, Seguin is a center. We all know Boston needs one of those so badly.

    A countless number of years huh? I think together, we can count them out. Savard as an elite player…1….2….3…4 and…..not so much. I would have assumed anyone else would be able to count that high, but you…yeah, not so much. Is that REALLY countless?

    Phaneuf came in on fire, stayed on fire for 3 years, tailed of last year and this year. Phaneuf is 24 years old! I think you are being a bit premature. Your like Albert Einsteins teachers.

  26. bbruins37 says:

    seguin is capable of playing wing.

    i also meant countless literally too. good job on calling me out on that one. kind of weird how he's been elite since the lockout after all the rule changes eh? as if he's well-suited to play in the new nhl almost…or that he was leading the league in points before going down to injury in 03/04. meh, he sucks.

    i also think we can stop referring to 64 games as half of a season too. i think it's fair to round it up to a full year. so phaneuf has tailed off for close to the last 40% of his career? solid.

  27. cam7777 says:

    Wasn'tt here some other crazy stat there too, like the team never lost so long as Richards scored a goal?

  28. bbruins37 says:

    9-0 when he scored, 7-7 when he didn't

  29. leafmeister says:

    Me thinks you are exaggerating a tiny bit. Lets just take a quick look at Phaneuf's statistics (fancy word for numbers). His 1st three years were lights out. One of the best defensmen in the league. 08/09 was below par, but just by his standards, he still put up 47 points, not bad for a defensemen. This year, he has struggled offensively no doubt, but, for the majority of the season he was playing on a team that had only a slightly better offense than the Bruins, that is saying A LOT.  Even Jarome Iginla is not a point per game guy there. So in reality, Phaneuf's defensive game tailed off last year, and his offensive game tailed off this year. He is not a liability, and here is the best parts, a) it cost us expiring contracts and inconsistent forwards to aquire him b) he is 24 years old! Two years removed from a Norris trophy nomination. He did not forget how to play, he will recover, and Darryl Sutter will have to be put on suicide watch.

    Oh of course, me thinks you just checked out Savards numbers, realized that he was not in fact elite until after the lockout, and proceeded to say that you were not serious. C'mon, you know its true…..

  30. cam7777 says:

    Hahahahaaha.

    O my *****ing God.  Are you *****ing kidding me? 

    So you've seen Seidenberg play 3 games now (or is it only 2?), and you're suddenly an expert on him him and willing to say he's better than Dion Phaneuf, who has already been nominated for a Norris?  That is hystericaly bullshit man.  You have got to love deluding yourself like this.

    Hey, whatever happened to Wideman?  Last I heard, he was better than Kaberle, and would challagne for the Norris within the next two seasons?  I guess Seidenberg has stepped right in to take that role, ey?

    Give me a *****ing break.

    Your team is in a dog fight for 8th place, and if they make it at all, will be immediately eliminated.  Chara will disappear like he awlays does in the playoffs, Bergeron will do nothing, like always, and Savard will look Paille for some snipes, only to come up, shockingly, empty-handed.

    Kadri is keeping pace with Taylor Hall in the OHL right now, whereas Colborne is having a hard time keeping pace with Tyler Ruegsegger and Jerry D'Amigo in the NCAA.  Colborne is soft, and just like no one on Hockey Canada thought he was good enough, nor will the Bruins.  The guy is already trade fodder.

    You have got to wake up man, and stop dealing in excuses and delusions.  If you wanna talk up your Bruins, fine, but stay away from the bullshit comparisons that make no bloody sense whatsoever.

  31. cam7777 says:

    He also had Kessel and/or Kovalchuk on his wing during all those "elite" seasons; a fact you somehow failed to mention.

    You're about the only person in the world that is worried about Phaneuf not panning out.  The issue with Phaneuf is that he got into cocaine with his buddy Mikka.  Issues like this have a way of clearing themselves up with a move to a new city, new boss, and new teammates.  And of course, growing up helps this fact too.

    Remember, all of the bullshit your saying about Phaneuf right now, was also said about Pronger, and we all know how that one turned out.  And besides, Phaneuf's "trailing-off" still put him in the top 15 for scoring by defensemen last year.  So really, the big trail off is pretty exagerrated.  It's only this season where he's actually struggled, and a lot of that has to do with being replaced by Jay Bouwmeester (now here's an over-rated defensemen).

  32. bbruins37 says:

    fun fact: it can be useful for defensemen to actually play defense. phaneuf's game consists of big hits and big shots. he really doesn't do anything else, and is frequently out of position.

    "for the majority of the season he was playing on a team that had only a slightly better offense than the Bruins, that is saying A LOT"

    is this one of your points for arguing that savard sucks too? please, just try to be consistent.

    "Oh of course, me thinks you just checked out Savards numbers, realized that he was not in fact elite until after the lockout, and proceeded to say that you were not serious. C'mon, you know its true….."

    lol people really have to stop questioning my ability to remember things. i absorb everything and just use it to prove people wrong over and over again.

    haha and i love the you're attempting to demean me by going after my intelligence. classic.

  33. cam7777 says:

    Savard's also what, 32 or 33, and signed until he's 40?  The deal is fine, but let's not pretend that the potential for it to be a liability doesn't exist.  For all we know, Boston is never able to outfit Savard with a suitable sniper again, and he never regains his PPG form.  Savard is not Crosby, yet you'd have a hard time guessing it from the way bbruins hypes him.

  34. leafmeister says:

    No, those two arguments have nothing to do with each other. Savard is struggling because he no longer has a dance partner. The Calgary comparison was just to give some context of how bad Calgary's offense is, bad, but not pathetic.

    "fun fact: it can be useful for defensemen to actually play defense. phaneuf's game consists of big hits and big shots. he really doesn't do anything else, and is frequently out of position."

    Just for future reference, are you just never ever going to back up your statements with statstics? Cause if so you can just tell us so we can all just ignore your posts.

    Provide 1, just 1, ONE, example of when you have proved anyone wrong.

  35. bbruins37 says:

    "So you've seen Seidenberg play 3 games now (or is it only 2?)"

    good point! too bad it's not true…

    wideman has what to do with this? he is having a bad season yes. he'll rebound.

    kadri is keeping up with hall how exactly? and colborne is a potential home-run prospect. i'm not worried about his point totals right now. he's a long-term prospect. they knew that going in.

    and as i'm typing this up savard has been hit with a brutal headshot by cooke and is out. cooke gets off free and savvy looks pretty bad…

  36. bbruins37 says:

    and you're failing to mention that he put up identical numbers with axelsson and a washed up murray the next year?

  37. bbruins37 says:

    1. i hope that savvy is ok. he really did not look good after that hit, and i can only hope he'll be ok after it.

    2. ***** cooke. he's a dirty cheapshot artist and deserves to be suspended indefinitely. blindside headshot, and even threw in a bit of elbow. worthless piece of shit that has to make his name doing shit like this.

    3. ***** the refs. no penalty. savvy just had the puck so you knew they had their eyes around that area. not even a 2 minute minor? fedotenko runs thomas about 30 seconds later. chance for a "make-up" call? nope. not to mention their first goal went in by their players hacking at thomas who had it covered up.

  38. leafmeister says:

    I have not seen the hit yet…did it break any specific rules? because it is not all that uncommon for those to go uncalled.

    Its only a matter of time before those hits become totally illegal. Sadly I think they will only make it officially illegal when it ends someones career, or comes damn close.

  39. bbruins37 says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z1vJrIAg-0&feature=player_embedded

    disgusting. don't put it past the nhl to ***** this one up yet again

  40. reinjosh says:

    its hockey
    the day those hits go out, is the day all contact goes out

    it was a hit that didn't need to happen, but I didn't look all that intentional.

    bbruins will probably call me a sick sadistic f*ck now though

  41. bbruins37 says:

    yeah clearly not intentional…

  42. leafmeister says:

    That hit is totally different though. Maybe they should just do it on a case by case scenario, that would not take hitting out of the game, but on scenarios like this, they could dole out a suspension.

    Just given how Savard had taken the shot, from a place that very low scoring percentage, had his head down, and Matt Cooke hasnt exactly been a man of the Bing in recent years, so I think a solid suspension would be just.

  43. bbruins37 says:

    yeah you'd have to be retarded or a biased bruin-hater like reinjosh (same thing?) to not think this warrants a suspension, or that this hit was fine. it's just ridiculous. you can't possibly justify that.

  44. reinjosh says:

    haha
    irked i don't really think the hit was all that bad
    ive seen worse
    and keep in mind i did say it was unneeded and it might have been a little bit borderline
    but not so bad
    and i don't hate the bruins
    i could care less
    i just have a certain distaste for one of its more delusional fans

  45. leafmeister says:

    Its not unlike the Neil on Drury (2007), Bell on Alfredsson (2008), Richards on Booth (2009). Its weird, cause it was not an elbow, it was not late, but it was just so unneeded, and Savard was so vulnerable. I think it warrants some action, not excessive, but I really don't think they can ignore the blindside any more.

  46. reinjosh says:

    I would kind of agree with that
    I see your point. I don't think it was dirty but definitely unneeded
    maybe a suspension would show the league they won't tolerate hits on players that are vulnerable

    The booth hit was clean though and just a really stupid play by booth

  47. DannyLeafs says:

    I do think Rask will play 40 games, but I will admit I hadn't even thought of Howard as a rookie. Mainly because of his age, how long he's been with the organization, and the fact that has spent long stretches (well not long, but long considering the criteria for a goalie) in the NHL as a backup that it hadn't really clicked that he is indeed eligible for the Calder. The problem is really with the definition of the trophy "the player deemed to be most proficient in his first season of competition in the NHL". It has already been tainted the year Gretzky was deemed ineligible, despite the fact that the definition of the award should have meant that he won it. The definition seems to imply that basically, whoever has the best numbers should win it, and because of that, a goalie should definitely be taking it home this year. 

    The problem is with the hockey writers who seem to consider themselves scouts, and consider it an embarrassment when they give the award to a guy who will likely not improve over their previous performance. I think with what happened to Mason this year, it will make many of them gun shy about voting for another goalie, and it will likely go to a forward.

    I know that the stats are often misleading, and that eligible rookie goaltenders actually have an easier time producing than rookie forwards, but it still doesn't make it right to just ignore the actual protocol because you think its dated. If it is so dated, then make changes to accommodate, not just simply do whatever you want despite the actual definition.

    It shouldn't matter that it is more likely for a defensemen or goaltender to have a bad follow-up season, if they have a better season, they should be rewarded for it.

  48. hockey_lover says:

    To me, it was an illegal hit as it came from outside Savard's peripheral vision. However, it was not a "headshot." Savard had just taken a shot and he was "bent forward" for lack of a better term. His head was about 8-10 inches lower than it normally would be if he was standing. My 6 year old son could have made it a headshot. So yes, he hit him in the head but thats because his head was where his elbow would normally have been. There was also no elbow on the play, despite what some biased blinder wearing fans might have seen.

    In any event, I hope Savard will be ok and Cooke should be suspended. Given the hits that like this that have happened recently, I think 7 – 10 games should suffice. No more than that .. again, not out for the season or whatever. Because it was Savard and not Ruutu has no bearing on it. The hit was illegal by a "questionable" player and taken into account the related hits from recent times, 7 – 10 games is adequate.

  49. bbruins37 says:

    i'm not saying it was all elbow or anything. but the elbow definitely connected wwith savard's head, likely around the jaw-bone.

  50. DannyLeafs says:

    It was an ugly hit, and very borderline whether or not it was intentional. I think a three game suspension should be given out, but I'm not sure it will be. I think the thing that could sway opinions is that Savard did play the puck, the elbow was down, and it just missed being shoulder to shoulder. I think a message needs to be sent though, because there are too many goons taking advantage of this type of lenience, and any chance they get to go head hunting and disguise it as an unintentional head shot, they take it and someone gets hurt. I am not saying that Cooke definitely went head hunting, but if they just make it automatic when you make contact with nothing but the head, then it would cut a lot of crap out of hockey. I don't mind a bit of incidental head contact, but if the only contact is to the head, it should be an automatic suspension.

Leave a Reply